Recherche Images Maps Play YouTube Actualités Gmail Drive Plus »
Connexion
Les utilisateurs de lecteurs d'écran peuvent cliquer sur ce lien pour activer le mode d'accessibilité. Celui-ci propose les mêmes fonctionnalités principales, mais il est optimisé pour votre lecteur d'écran.

Brevets

  1. Recherche avancée dans les brevets
Numéro de publicationUS5970464 A
Type de publicationOctroi
Numéro de demandeUS 08/926,804
Date de publication19 oct. 1999
Date de dépôt10 sept. 1997
Date de priorité10 sept. 1997
État de paiement des fraisCaduc
Numéro de publication08926804, 926804, US 5970464 A, US 5970464A, US-A-5970464, US5970464 A, US5970464A
InventeursChidanand Vinayak Apte, Edna Grossman, Edwin Peter Dawson Pednault, Barry Kumin Rosen, Fateh Ali Tipu, Hsueh-ju Wang, Brian Frederick White
Cessionnaire d'origineInternational Business Machines Corporation
Exporter la citationBiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan
Liens externes: USPTO, Cession USPTO, Espacenet
Data mining based underwriting profitability analysis
US 5970464 A
Résumé
A computer implemented method of underwriting profitability analysis delivers the analytic process to a wide cross section of insurance decision makers. The underwriting profitability analysis system leverages an existing investment in databases and improves underwriting business processes. Data mining techniques are applied to historical policy and claims to extract rules that describe policy holders with homogeneous claim frequency and severity characteristics. These rule sets are used to classify policy holders into distinct risk groups, each with its own set of characteristics, including pure premium. Breaking up a book of business into segments allows identification of sub-populations of policy holders that distinctly deviate from the expected normal pure premium. This identification allow the insurance business analysts to interactively adjust eligibility criteria and examine altered characteristics of the covered segments until satisfactory. The system is implemented on a client server using network centric language technology.
Images(14)
Previous page
Next page
Revendications(7)
Having thus described my invention, what we claim as new and desire to secure by letters patent is as follows:
1. A computer implemented method of underwriting profitability analysis comprising the steps of:
accessing existing databases of historical policy and claims;
initiating data mining techniques to the accessed data to extract rules that describe policy holders with homogeneous claim frequency and claim severity characteristics;
using the extracted rules to classify policy holders into distinct risk groups, each with its own set of characteristics, including pure premium; and
identifying sub-populations of policy holders that distinctly deviate from the expected normal pure premium to allow the insurance business analysts to interactively adjust the eligibility criteria and examine altered characteristics of the covered risk groups.
2. The computer implemented method of underwriting profitability analysis recited in claim 1 wherein the method is implemented on a client server platform that employs network centric language technology, thereby allowing a server based analytic methodology that can be simultaneously accessed across an intranet or Internet by several decision makers, from diverse function areas in a firm.
3. The computer implemented method of underwriting profitability analysis recited in claim 2 wherein the method is implemented using an Internet enabled software platform wherein the application interface is controllable by a user running a light weight Internet client and wherein the data intensive and computer intensive work is performed on a server on a network connected to the Internet.
4. A computer implemented method of underwriting profitability analysis comprising the steps of:
accessing existing databases of historical polic and claims;
initiating data mining techniques to the accessed data to extract rules that describe policy holders with homogeneous claim frequency and claim severity characteristics;
using the extracted rules to classify policy holders into distinct risk groups, each with its own set of characteristics, including pure premium; and
identifying sub-populations of policy holders that distinctly deviate from the expected normal pure premium to allow the insurance business analysts to interactively adjust the eligibility criteria and examine altered characteristics of the covered risk groups,
wherein the step of accessing existing databases comprises the steps of:
displaying databases for selection by a user;
responding to a user selection of a database by requesting data from data storage and computing univariate statistics;
updating and parsing meta-data and returning updated and parsed meta-data in response to the data request; and
generating and displaying a data summary of the returned updated and parsed meta-data.
5. The computer implemented method of underwriting profitability analysis recited in claim 4 wherein the step of initiating data mining techniques comprises the steps of:
responding to a user selection of a data set for a data mining operation by mining data in the selected data set to produce policy pure premium prediction rules and storing the rules; and
displaying a data summary of rule sets from the data mining operation.
6. The computer implemented method of underwriting profitability analysis recited in claim 5 wherein the step of using the extracted rules to classify policy holders into distinct risk groups comprises the steps of:
responding to a user selection of a rule set by displaying summary statistics of the selected rule set; and
editing the rule set in response to editing commands from the user.
7. The computer implemented method of underwriting profitability analysis recited in claim 6 wherein the step of identifying sub-populations of policy holders comprises the steps of:
receiving user input specified data set, rule set and product eligibility criteria;
segmenting the data set by eligibility criteria and rule set; and
displaying a segmentation table of the segmented data set.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

The present invention generally relates to methods of underwriting profitability analysis and, more particularly, to a computer implemented process that applies data mining techniques to historical policy and claims for extracting rules that describe policy holders and uses these rules to classify policy holders into distinct risk groups.

2. Background Description

The first problem addressed by this invention is the robust and rigorous estimation of pure premiums for Property and Casualty (P&C) insurance books of business. These could be ongoing books of business, or new products under consideration. P&C insurance businesses need to constantly evaluate their existing and proposed books of business to identify potential issues and problems with populations they cover. Essentially, associated with each book of business is an insurance product which covers a (potentially vast) group of policy holders that have subscribed to the product. Inevitably, some policy holders file for claims. Associated with claims is their frequency (the rate at which they occur) and their severity (the amount at which they are settled). Insurance companies need to ensure that the premiums being charged are adequate to cover the claims being paid out, and the required profit margin. One approach to ensure this is to estimate the "pure premium" of each policy holder (the premium at which their expected claims payout equals premium charged). If the average pure premium across en entire book of business is equal to or less than the actual premium that goes with the product, then the business is essentially operating at a safe level.

The second problem addressed by this invention is the efficient delivery of the analytic process to a wide cross section of insurance decision makers in the actuarial, marketing, and underwriting areas. These functions could potentially be very disconnected in a firm, yet require a common set of solutions for the first problem detailed above.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide a method of underwriting profitability analysis and the efficient delivery of the analytic process to a wide cross section of insurance decision makers.

It is another object of the invention to provide an underwriting profitability analysis system that leverages an existing investment in databases and improves underwriting business processes.

According to the present invention, there is provided a computer based technique that applies data mining techniques to historical policy and claims for extracting rules that describe policy holders with homogeneous claim frequency and severity characteristics, and then further uses these rule sets to classify policy holders into distinct risk groups, each with its own set of characteristics, including pure premium.

Breaking up a book of business into segments allows identification of sub-populations of policy holders that distinctly deviate from the expected normal pure premium. This identification will allow the insurance business analysts to interactively adjust the eligibility criteria and examine altered characteristics of the covered segments until satisfactory.

Secondly, this invention provides a client server solution that employs JAVA, a network centric language technology, thereby allowing a server based analytic methodology that can be simultaneously accessed across an intranet or internet by several decision makers, from diverse function areas in a firm.

This solution implements a unique computer based interactive capability that offers a "what-if" scenario analysis for exploring books of business by combining data mining rules with insurance product eligibility criteria.

This solution also implements the use of an Internet enabling software platform, such as Java, for the application interface and user control. This allows the user to run light weight interfaces on a variety of typical end-user machines, while off loading the data intensive and computer intensive work to a server on a network.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The foregoing and other objects, aspects and advantages will be better understood from the following detailed description of a preferred embodiment of the invention with reference to the drawings, in which:

FIG. 1 is a block diagram of the underwriting profitability analysis method according to the invention implemented on a client server system;

FIG. 2 is a default user interface screen displayed at the client showing the databases available to a user for a data mining operation;

FIG. 3 is a flow diagram of the client/server databases process that produces the screen of FIG. 2;

FIG. 4 is a user interface screen displayed at the client in response to selecting the Data Mining tab and is used to initiate a data mining operation at the server;

FIG. 5 is a flow diagram of the data mining client/server process initiated from the screen of FIG. 4;

FIG. 6 is a user interface screen displayed at the client in responses to selecting the Rule Sets tab and shows existing models derived from the data mining process;

FIG. 7 is a flow diagram of the rule sets display process;

FIG. 8 is a user interface screen displayed at the client in response to selecting the Viewer tab and provides the user with a view of rule sets;

FIG. 9 is a flow diagram of the viewer process initiated from the screen of FIG. 8;

FIG. 10 is the user viewer interface screen showing a pop up menu which allows the user to select rule sets using a filtering operation;

FIG. 11 is a user interface screen displayed at the client in response to selecting the Editing tab and allows the user to create a rule set;

FIG. 12 is a flow diagram of the editor used for rule set creation, model editing and rule editing;

FIG. 13 is a user interface screen displayed at the client in response to selecting the Scenarios tab and is used to initiate a scenario analysis; and

FIG. 14 is a flow diagram of the scenario analysis process.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF A PREFERRED EMBODIMENT OF THE INVENTION

Referring now to the drawings, and more particularly to FIG. 1, there is shown a block diagram showing the Underwriting Profitability Analysis (UPA) method according to the invention implemented on a client server system. The server 10 is to the left of the dotted line, and the client 20 is to the right of the dotted line. The server 10 is comprised of a data warehouse 101 which is accessed by a data mining server kernel 102. This kernel may be written in the C++ object oriented programming language.

The data warehouse 101 contains data derived from various data bases. There are a plurality of disparate data sources, generally indicated by reference numeral 103. These include internal data and external data. Internal data would include, for example, company transactional data such as policies and claims, while the external data would include demographic and psychographic data. This data is extracted from the several disparate data sources and converted and otherwise formatted into a desired format at 104 prior to storing in a common data warehouse 101. For example, an insurance company's historical data on policies and claims is organized for a particular product (e.g., automobile insurance) by state. Data warehouse 101 can be a disk subsystem of the server 10.

The client 20 comprises a business analysis client 201 which communicates with the data mining server kernel 102. In response to a query by the business analysis client 201, the data mining kernel 102 runs a data mining process on the data in data warehouse 101 for extracting rules for statistically distinct subpopulations with homogeneous pure premium characteristics based upon standard technology from, for example, Predictive Data Mining by Weiss and Indurkhya, Morgan Kaufmann (1997). A user of the system is allowed to define to the solution a book of business (either existing or proposed) by typing in the eligibility criteria for the book as a set of "If" conditions. The business analysis client 201 may be written in the Java programming language.

The business analysis client 201 receives data from the data mining server kernel 102, and the risk group defined by the book of business is segmented into distinct segments by utilizing the pure premium rules extracted by data mining the historical claims and policy data. This generates several outputs. For example, a marketing output 202 might identify new opportunities, an actuarial output 203 might be an estimation of improved profitability, and an underwriting output 204 might suggest enhanced exception management.

An insurance company's historical policy and claims data typically resides on enterprise level databases, in transaction format, typically on a quarterly basis. Several quarters worth of data, usually sixteen quarters or more, is first extracted, for a given business region of interest, such as a state. Since policy and claims data usually reside separately, the extracts are first joined so that records are available, per quarter, on a joint policy-claim basis. From this data, which usually will be in the order of a few gigabytes, a statistically valid sample is extracted for the data mining run.

The data that is mined is a collection of quarterly records. Each record corresponds to vehicle level information for a quarter, including policy, claims, and demographic information. In this data, a pair of fields (known as the "response" variables) will be the target of the data mining process. This pair is usually the claim frequency and claim severity.

The data mining engine extracts from the data a set of rules that utilize the most appropriate subset of the remaining fields in the data (known as the "explanatory" variables) in its antecedent. The consequence of such rules will typically be a prediction of a pure premium for the data points that satisfy the antecedent. The prediction will be probabilistic, i.e., associated with the prediction, in addition to the actual pure premium, will be estimates of the accuracy and confidence in the accuracy. An example of a rule extracted by the data mining process might be "If `male driver` and `age less than 25` and `car type is 2-door sports sedan`, Then `estimated quarterly pure premium=$700` with `error estimate=0.2` and `confidence interval=0.008`." Note that the rule set extracted by the data mining run will potentially have many such rules, perhaps in the hundreds.

Additionally, the system will have the user input to the system a set of eligibility criteria that define an insurance product that needs to be investigated. An example of a particular insurance product that is marketed in a state may be targeted towards "males between 25 and 65" with "zero accident violations" and "a car type is 2-door sports sedan or 4-door AWD SUV" with a quarterly premium of $350. A product will typically be able to be defined by a handful of such criteria.

A book of business can now be looked at using the data mining rule set and the insurance product eligibility criteria. For example, the book of business may be a certain geographical region with two million policy holders. The product eligibility criteria, when applied to this book, may further sub-select 40,000 policies; i.e., only those policy holders that are entitled to the product. When the data mining rules are applied to this subset, the rules will break up the eligibility subset into as many segments as there are rules, each with its particular set of pure premium characteristics.

The end user can now examine each of these segments and their estimated pure premiums. For example, if the product's actual premium is $350, and segments that fall within the eligibility list and whose estimated pure premiums are significantly higher than this figure are candidates for exclusion from the product. The user of the solution can now begin interactively experimenting with fine tuning the eligibility criteria for the product, until the segments that are dragging the overall loss down are satisfactorily removed. This "what-if" scenario analysis can be potentially performed on a firm's existing insurance products, as well as new insurance products that may be under consideration.

The application interface that enables the end-user to control the setting up and execution of the data mining, the specification of the product eligibility criteria, and perform the "what-if" scenario analyses is implemented in Java, and runs on typical end-user client platforms. The data mining engine, the scenario analysis functionality, along with the data sets, reside on a network based server.

The graphic user interface (GUI) offers a notebook paradigm, with the user controlling and using the solution through the tab metaphor. The tabs on the notebook correspond to Database Information, Data Mining Initiation, Model Viewing, Model Editing, and Scenario Analysis. These tabs and the intended functionality within each are described below.

Database Information

This tab displays the screen shown in FIG. 2 and will be typically the first screen open by default when the UPA solution is started. It displays the status of all the data bases that are potentially available, for data mining as well as analyses. Using a scroll bar list, a user is able to select a database, and right below, be able to see all the fields that are present in the data, including their names, data types, and descriptions. Clicking on any of the field rows allows more detailed statistics about that field to be displayed to the user.

FIG. 3 is a flow diagram of the database process which produces the screen shown in FIG. 2. Again, following the pattern of FIG. 1, the server process is on the left side of the drawing and the client process is on the right side of the drawing. A user, using the screen of FIG. 2, selects a data set in function block 301. In response to this selection, the client process requests meta-data from the server process in function block 302. The server process meanwhile accesses data from data storage 303 and computes univariate statistics in function block 304. The output of this computation is used in function block 305 to update meta-data in meta-data store 306. The requested meta-data is parsed in function block 307 and returned to the client.

Once the requested meta-data has been returned, it is used to generate and display a data summary at function block 308. The user is now given a choice in user input block 309. The user can select a field property at selection block 310, select a field at selection block 311, or select a data set at selection block 312. If a field property is selected, the client process sorts data summary by property column in function block 313. The sorted data summary is then displayed for the user in function block 308. If the user selects a data field, the client process requests univariate statistics from the server in function block 314. The requested univariate statistics are retrieved from the meta-data store 306 and parsed in function block 307 and returned to the client process. When returned from the server, the univariate statistics are formatted for display in function block 315 and the data displayed in function block 308. If the user selects a data set, the selection goes to function block 302 where the client process requests meta-data from the server process. The returned data is again sent to function block 308 where it is displayed.

Data Mining Initiation

When the data mining tab is selected, the data mining initiation screen shown in FIG. 4 is displayed. This screen allows a user to select one of the databases that are available for a data mining run. In addition to this specification, the user has to also select a frequency response variable, a severity response variable, the explanatory variables, variables to be excluded, and variables for post-mining analysis. When the "Submit Task" button, from the "File" pull down menu, is selected, the application will initiate the server with a data mining run. This run is expected to produce rules for the severity and frequency response variables, using the explanatory variables. The explanatory variables and excluded variables are mutually exclusive; the system will maintain this exclusion. The variables for post-mining analysis are not required explicitly in the data mining run, but are collected in this screen merely as a convenient place holder, and to keep the end-user's focus on the post-mining analysis as the ultimate goal of the solution.

FIG. 5 is the flow diagram of the data mining client/server process. In response to the user selecting a data set in function block 501, the client process requests meta-data from the server process in function block 502. The server process accesses meta-data from data store 503 and parses the meta-data in function block 504 and returns it to the client process.

When the requested meta-data is returned, the client process displays a data summary in function block 505. The user is then presented with choices in user selection block 506. The user can either select explanatory variables in selection block 507, select response variables in selection block 508, or initiate a mining run in selection block 509. If the user selects explanatory variables, the explanatory variables are displayed in function block 505. If the user selects response variables, the response variables are displayed in function block 505. However, if the user selects initiate a mining run, then a call is made to the server process to prepare a meta rule set in function block 510.

In response to this call, the server process mines data to produce policy pure premium prediction rules in function block 511. This is done by accessing data in data store 512 and meta-data store 503. The resulting rule sets are stored in rule sets store 513.

Results Presentation and Analysis

Results are available for presentation, editing, and business analysis. The screen shown in FIG. 6 is displayed with the Rule Sets tab is selected. This screen lists all the rule sets that are created by data mining runs, as well as edited rule sets that may have been created by the user. In addition, if there is a data mining run that is currently in progress, a pending tasks list displays information about when the run was initiated and when it might expect to complete.

In the case of rule sets extracted by data mining, the name of the rule set, and the dates of initiation and completion are included for distinguishing between the different rule sets. In the case of edited rule sets, the source and base rule sets' names is appended to the name of a user, in the list.

FIG. 7 is the flow diagram of the client/server process for display of the rule sets resulting from a data mining operation. The display function block 701 in the client process access data from a local rule sets store 702 and rule sets from a rule sets store 703 in the server. In addition, the display function 701 access data 704 from the server concerning pending mining tasks. With the displayed rule set directory, including information on pending tasks, the user is prompted to make a selection in user selection block 705. The selected rule set in selection block 706 is then returned to the client process.

It is expected that at this point the end-user will select one of the preexisting data mining models or user edited rule sets for continuing an analysis. In the event that the user is awaiting the pending data mining run before anything can be done, then this screen will be periodically visited by the user, until the data mining run is completed, and the results available.

Model Viewer

When the Viewer tab is selected, the viewer screen shown in FIG. 8 is displayed. This screen allows a user to see in further detail particulars about a model or an edited rule set that has been selected from the existing models screen. In addition to identifying the database name on which the model was trained or evaluated, this screen also displays the accuracy estimate of the model in terms of several statistics. Also, the rules that comprise this model will be available for inspection in this screen. One individual rule will be displayed at a time, but a scroll facility allows the entire rule set to be scrolled through for a rule. The screen will display the actual rule in "If-Then" English-like notation. The individual rule statistics will also be displayed, including a predictor value and a confidence interval, and the coverage of the rule for the database.

The flow diagram from the viewer client/server process is shown in FIG. 9. In function block 901, rule sets' summary statistics are displayed. This is done by accessing local rule sets from local store 902 and rule sets from the server store 903. The user is given three choices in selection block 904. The user can select a rule set for editing in selection block 905, select to test a rule set in selection block 906, or select to re-calibrate a rule set in selection block 907. If the user selects a rule set for editing, the editor is invoked, as described in more detail below. If the user selects to test a rule set, then a call is made to the server to test the selected rule set to a selected data set in function block 907. This is done by accessing data from the client local store 902, from the server store 903, from the meta-data store 908, and from the data store 909. The result of the test is returned to the client process which displays the data in function block 901. If the user selects to re-calibrate a rule set, a call is made to the server process which calibrates the selected rule set against a selected data set in function block 910. Again, this is done by accessing data from the client local store 902, from the server store 903, from the meta-data store 908, and from the data store 909. The result of the test is returned to the client process which displays the data in function block 901.

The user can also directly jump to applying the selected model to another database, by clicking on the "Test" button from the "File" pull down menu. This will cause the data mining server to apply the selected model to the specified database, and evaluate and report the accuracy of the model on the data.

Creating and Editing Derived and New Rule Sets

Using a rule set extracted by data mining, a user can edit it to create new rule sets, or create new rule sets completely from scratch. One universal mechanism that will be supported in the UPA solution is a pop-up rule selection mechanism for filtering out a desired subset from a base model. The screen shown in FIG. 10 is an instance of this facility. Essentially, given a base rule set, this filer will allow the user to select zero or more explanatory variables that need to be present in a rule for it to be selected. Simultaneously, the user can select another set of zero or more variables that need to be absent in a rule for it to be selected. Using this combination of constrain specification for inclusion and exclusion will permit a powerful mechanism for extracting desired subsets of rules.

Rule Set Creation

Rule set creation is done using the editing screen shown FIG. 11. This screen is displayed in response to selecting the Editing tab. Rule set creation is the first step in editing or creating new rule sets. It is the intention that the rule sets extracted by the data mining will be preserved in their original form. Any changes desired to be made to these will be essentially done by copying the original model, and then making changes to the copy. The rule set creation screen allows a user to select a source, which could be an original base model extracted by data mining, or an edited rule set created by the user. In addition to using the filtering mechanism described previously, the user can do simple actions like copying rule by rule, or all the rules, into the copy. The copy becomes the target model, to which the user can assign a name, and carry out simple edits, such as individual rule deletions. More advanced modification capability is offered in the subsequent model and rule editing screens.

Editing

The editing screen shown in FIG. 11 allows the user to select and edit a copy or a previously edited copy of a rule set. The screen allows the user to scroll through the rules that comprise the rule set. Individual rules can be deleted, edited, or new rules can be created from scratch. Editing existing rules or creating new rules causes the application to take the user to the rule editing screen. At any instance during the course of the editing, the user can either check individual rules or the rule set as a whole by specifying a database and selecting either "Apply Model" or "Check Rule" from the "File" pull down menu. This checking results in the system reporting to the user the performance of the selected entity on the specified data.

The editing screen shown in FIG. 11 permits a user to edit existing rules or create completely new rules utilizing a pull down menu that constrains the user to the list of allowable variable names and possible tests. The screen is broken up into two parts. One part is the clause editor, in which the user is actually building or modifying a clause to add to a rule, while the other part displays the rule composition as a whole.

Editor

The client/sever editor process is shown in the flow diagram of FIG. 12. This editor is used for the foregoing three functions of rule creation, model editing and rule editing. Using the example of rule editing in the example illustrated in FIG. 12, the selected rule (for example, from selection block 905 in FIG. 9), is input at function block 1401 and the rule is displayed in function block 1402. The user is given two choices in user selection block 1403. The user can either select a rule in selection block 1404 or select to edit or add to a rule in selection block 1405. If the user wishes to select a rule, rules are displayed in function block 1402 for purposes of the user making that selection. This is done by accessing rule sets from local store 1406 and rule sets in the server store 1407. Assuming that the user has made a selection of a rule, the user may then select to edit or add to the rule. Typical editing actions of editing a clause in 1408, deleting a clause in 1409, and adding a clause in 1410 are available to the user. Once the editing action has been completed, it is committed in function block 1411. This act of committing makes a call to the server process to test the selected rule set to a selected data set in function block 1412. This is done by accessing data from the client local store 1406, from the server store 1407, from the meta-data store 1413, and from the data store 1414. The result of the test is returned to the client process which displays the data in function block 1402. The user may also select to re-calibrate a rule set. A call is made to the server process which calibrates the selected rule set against a selected data set in function block 1415. Again, this is done by accessing data from the client local store 1406, from the server store 1407, from the meta-data store 1413, and from the data store 1415. The result of the test is returned to the client process which displays the data in function block 1402.

Scenario Analysis

The scenario analysis subsystem is a crucial piece in the UPA solution that ties in the data mining process to the business problems at hand. The idea here is to allow the user to determine the value of a P&C insurance product by specifying it to the system, and having the system provide critical business information about the product, segment by segment. The scenario analysis screen shown in FIG. 13 is displayed when the user selects the Scenarios tab. Using the scenario analysis screen, the user will specify a database to analyze, a data mining model to be used as the base, and a product/population identifier. A product identifier is essentially a user created rule set, that could either represent an existing product, or a new product under consideration. Once specified, and the "Analyze" button selected from the "File" pull down menu, the system will perform a scenario analysis, and display to the user, in a subsequent screen, a detailed segmentation report.

FIG. 14 is the flow diagram of the client/server scenario analysis process. The user specified data set, rule set, and product eligibility data are input in function block 1601. This is done by accessing local rule sets in client store 1602, rule sets in server store 1603 and meta-data in meta-data store 1604. The specified data set is segmented by eligibility criteria and the rule set in function block 1605. This is done by accessing data in server data store 1606 and making a call to the server to test the selected rule set to a selected data set in function block 1607. This is done by accessing data from the client local store 1602, the server store 1603, the meta-data store 1604 and the data store 1606. Then, in function block 1608, the segmentation table is displayed. The user is given three choices in user selection block 1609. The user can either select a column in selection block 1610, select a row in selection block 1611, or select a column in selection block 1612. If the user selects a column in selection block 1610, the table is resorted in function block 1613 and a return is made to function block 1607 to display the resorted table if the user selects a row, the rule editor on the rule is called in function block 1614 and a return is made to function block 1608. If the user selects a column in selection block 1612, the rule editor on eligibility criteria is called in function block 1615 and a return is made to function block 1608.

The scenario analysis result will first report on the gross statistics on how the product rule set covered the database, and within this coverage, using the base model, will be a detailed segmentation report that breaks down the coverage into individual segments, listed by the segments' coverage, percentage coverage, severity estimate, frequency estimate, pure premium, loss ration, and other entries that may be of interest. In addition, the screen will permit the table to be sorted by any of these columns. This "what-if" style scenario analysis will assist the users to identify problems and opportunities with existing as well as new P&C products.

While the invention has been described in terms of a single preferred embodiment, those skilled in the art will recognize that the invention can be practiced with modification within the spirit and scope of the appended claims.

Citations de brevets
Brevet cité Date de dépôt Date de publication Déposant Titre
US4766539 *15 juil. 198723 août 1988Fox Henry LMethod of determining the premium for and writing a policy insuring against specified weather conditions
US4975840 *17 juin 19884 déc. 1990Lincoln National Risk Management, Inc.Method and apparatus for evaluating a potentially insurable risk
US5586313 *12 févr. 199317 déc. 1996L.I.D.P. Consulting Services, Inc.Method for updating a file
US5692107 *20 sept. 199625 nov. 1997Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.Method for generating predictive models in a computer system
US5712984 *11 mai 199327 janv. 1998Risk Data CorporationSystem for funding future workers' compensation losses
US5752237 *18 mai 199512 mai 1998Mottola Cherny & Associates, Inc.Method and apparatus for providing professional liability coverage
US5781911 *10 sept. 199614 juil. 1998D2K, IncorporatedIntegrated system and method of data warehousing and delivery
US5809478 *8 déc. 199515 sept. 1998Allstate Insurance CompanyMethod for accessing and evaluating information for processing an application for insurance
Citations hors brevets
Référence
1Bentley, Trevor, "Mining for Information," Management Accounting-London, vol. 75, No. 6 (Jun. 1997), p.56.
2 *Bentley, Trevor, Mining for Information, Management Accounting London, vol. 75, No. 6 (Jun. 1997), p.56.
3Derrig, Richard A., "Fuzzy Techniques of Pattern Recognition in Risk and Claims Classification," The Journal of Risk and Insurance, vol. 62 (Sept. 1995), pp. 447-482.
4 *Derrig, Richard A., Fuzzy Techniques of Pattern Recognition in Risk and Claims Classification, The Journal of Risk and Insurance, vol. 62 (Sept. 1995), pp. 447 482.
5Gallagher, Cecily, "Risk Classification Aided by New Software Tool,"National Underwriter Property & Casualty Risk Benefits and Management, No. 17, p.19, Apr. 27, 1992.
6 *Gallagher, Cecily, Risk Classification Aided by New Software Tool, National Underwriter Property & Casualty Risk Benefits and Management, No. 17, p.19, Apr. 27, 1992.
Référencé par
Brevet citant Date de dépôt Date de publication Déposant Titre
US6182048 *23 nov. 199830 janv. 2001General Electric CompanySystem and method for automated risk-based pricing of a vehicle warranty insurance policy
US6324533 *29 mai 199827 nov. 2001International Business Machines CorporationIntegrated database and data-mining system
US6332125 *18 déc. 199818 déc. 2001Spincor LlcProviding termination benefits for employees
US641528430 juin 19992 juil. 2002Rivio, Inc.Intelligent forms for improved automated workflow processing
US6449597 *7 déc. 199810 sept. 2002Mcgill Andrew R.System for assembly and distribution of automobiles utilizing a plurality of partner integrators and a plurality of manufactured and service modules
US64703527 août 200122 oct. 2002Fujitsu LimitedData display apparatus and method for displaying data mining results as multi-dimensional data
US64775387 août 20015 nov. 2002Fujitsu LimitedData display apparatus and method for displaying data mining results as multi-dimensional data
US6502091 *23 févr. 200031 déc. 2002Hewlett-Packard CompanyApparatus and method for discovering context groups and document categories by mining usage logs
US6535868 *27 août 199818 mars 2003Debra A. GaleazziMethod and apparatus for managing metadata in a database management system
US6567786 *16 sept. 199920 mai 2003International Business Machines CorporationSystem and method for increasing the effectiveness of customer contact strategies
US6697800 *19 mai 200024 févr. 2004Roxio, Inc.System and method for determining affinity using objective and subjective data
US674202328 avr. 200025 mai 2004Roxio, Inc.Use-sensitive distribution of data files between users
US676899423 févr. 200127 juil. 2004Trimble Navigation LimitedWeb based data mining and location data reporting and system
US6836773 *27 sept. 200128 déc. 2004Oracle International CorporationEnterprise web mining system and method
US686560019 mai 20008 mars 2005Napster, Inc.System and method for selecting internet media channels
US694459730 oct. 200113 sept. 2005Spincor LlcProviding termination benefits for employees
US6968500 *4 avr. 200122 nov. 2005Dmitry MikhailovAutomatic forms handling system
US698808230 déc. 200217 janv. 2006Fannie MaeComputerized systems and methods for facilitating the flow of capital through the housing finance industry
US7003489 *8 sept. 199921 févr. 2006Ge Capital Commercial Finance, Inc.Methods and apparatus for submitting information to an automated lending system
US7072841 *29 avr. 19994 juil. 2006International Business Machines CorporationMethod for constructing segmentation-based predictive models from data that is particularly well-suited for insurance risk or profitability modeling purposes
US708930111 août 20008 août 2006Napster, Inc.System and method for searching peer-to-peer computer networks by selecting a computer based on at least a number of files shared by the computer
US709542623 juin 200022 août 2006Computer Sciences CorporationGraphical user interface with a hide/show feature for a reference system in an insurance claims processing system
US711720817 déc. 20043 oct. 2006Oracle CorporationEnterprise web mining system and method
US7117215 *7 juin 20013 oct. 2006Informatica CorporationMethod and apparatus for transporting data for data warehousing applications that incorporates analytic data interface
US716507119 déc. 200116 janv. 2007Napster, Inc.Real-time search engine
US719750825 juil. 200327 mars 2007Brown Iii Frederick RSystem and method for obtaining, evaluating, and reporting market information
US7200613 *4 nov. 20023 avr. 2007Xerox CorporationAsset management system for network-based and non-network-based assets and information
US72400161 févr. 20013 juil. 2007F. A. Richard & Associates Inc.Method and apparatus for improving the loss ratio on an insurance program book
US724608327 mars 200317 juil. 2007International Business Machines CorporationSystem and method for targeted marketing of goods and/or services to specific customers
US724904016 mars 200624 juil. 2007Trurisk, L.L.C.Computerized medical underwriting of group life and disability insurance using medical claims data
US73106293 avr. 200218 déc. 2007Napster, Inc.Method and apparatus for controlling file sharing of multimedia files over a fluid, de-centralized network
US732000313 févr. 200415 janv. 2008Genworth Financial, Inc.Method and system for storing and retrieving document data using a markup language string and a serialized string
US734042416 déc. 20034 mars 2008Fannie MaeSystem and method for facilitating sale of a loan to a secondary market purchaser
US734330723 juin 200011 mars 2008Computer Sciences CorporationDynamic help method and system for an insurance claims processing system
US735986329 sept. 200015 avr. 2008Computer Sciences CorporationCondition component framework for reinsurance
US737036616 nov. 20016 mai 2008International Business Machines CorporationData management system and method
US738323930 avr. 20033 juin 2008Genworth Financial, Inc.System and process for a fusion classification for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US7386463 *9 août 200110 juin 2008Miralink CorporationData/presence insurance tools and techniques
US739220118 mai 200124 juin 2008Trurisk, LlcInsurance claim forecasting system
US739821923 juin 20008 juil. 2008Computer Sciences CorporationSystem and method for displaying messages using a messages table
US741840023 juin 200026 août 2008Computer Sciences CorporationInternet-enabled system and method for assessing damages
US743051423 juin 200030 sept. 2008Computer Sciences CorporationSystem and method for processing insurance claims using a table of contents
US743051523 juin 200030 sept. 2008Computer Sciences CorporationSystem and method for externalization of formulas for assessing damages
US745114831 oct. 200211 nov. 2008Computer Sciences CorporationMethod of modifying a business rule while tracking the modifications
US746102017 déc. 20032 déc. 2008Fannie MaeSystem and method for creating and tracking agreements for selling loans to a secondary market purchaser
US746404514 févr. 20019 déc. 2008The Workplace Helpline, LlcMethod and apparatus for managing workplace services and products
US748384023 août 200227 janv. 2009Atera /Solutions LlcRandomized competitive insurance pricing system and method
US755543821 juil. 200630 juin 2009Trurisk, LlcComputerized medical modeling of group life insurance using medical claims data
US755543921 juil. 200630 juin 2009Trurisk, LlcComputerized medical underwriting of group life insurance using medical claims data
US756791430 avr. 200328 juil. 2009Genworth Financial, Inc.System and process for dominance classification for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US757110723 juin 20004 août 2009Computer Sciences CorporationSystem and method for externalization of rules for assessing damages
US759388930 déc. 200222 sept. 2009Fannie MaeSystem and method for processing data pertaining to financial assets
US759389330 déc. 200522 sept. 2009Fannie MaeComputerized systems and methods for facilitating the flow of capital through the housing finance industry
US76102104 sept. 200327 oct. 2009Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem for the acquisition of technology risk mitigation information associated with insurance
US76172404 mai 199910 nov. 2009Accenture LlpComponent based task handling during claim processing
US763091014 juin 20028 déc. 2009Genworth Financial, Inc.System for case-based insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US7647238 *7 mars 200112 janv. 2010Chrysler Group LlcComputer-implemented vehicle repair claims rules generator system
US765359230 déc. 200526 janv. 2010Fannie MaeSystem and method for processing a loan
US765747530 déc. 20042 févr. 2010Fannie MaeProperty investment rating system and method
US766466216 mars 200616 févr. 2010Trurisk LlcComputerized medical modeling of group life and disability insurance using medical claims data
US767638731 oct. 20029 mars 2010Computer Sciences CorporationGraphical display of business rules
US768944231 oct. 200230 mars 2010Computer Science CorporationMethod of generating a graphical display of a business rule with a translation
US769373129 sept. 20006 avr. 2010Computer Sciences CorporationBusiness process framework for reinsurance
US769815913 févr. 200413 avr. 2010Genworth Financial Inc.Systems and methods for performing data collection
US770258026 déc. 200220 avr. 2010Fannie MaeSystem and method for mortgage loan pricing, sale and funding
US7707071 *26 oct. 200627 avr. 2010Rod RigoleSystems and methods for online selection of service providers and management of service accounts
US77115844 sept. 20034 mai 2010Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem for reducing the risk associated with an insured building structure through the incorporation of selected technologies
US774298116 déc. 200422 juin 2010Fannie MaeMortgage loan commitment system and method
US774751916 déc. 200329 juin 2010Fannie MaeSystem and method for verifying loan data at delivery
US774752623 août 200629 juin 2010Fannie MaeSystem and method for transferring mortgage loan servicing rights
US776515121 juil. 200627 juil. 2010Fannie MaeComputerized systems and methods for facilitating the flow of capital through the housing finance industry
US778350512 nov. 200824 août 2010Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for computerized insurance rating
US778829629 déc. 200531 août 2010Guidewire Software, Inc.Method and apparatus for managing a computer-based address book for incident-related work
US7801748 *30 avr. 200321 sept. 2010Genworth Financial, Inc.System and process for detecting outliers for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US780175714 févr. 200121 sept. 2010Teradata Us, Inc.Computer implemented customer value model in airline industry
US780180924 juin 200521 sept. 2010Fannie MaeSystem and method for management of delegated real estate project reviews
US780963316 déc. 20035 oct. 2010Fannie MaeSystem and method for pricing loans in the secondary mortgage market
US781394530 avr. 200312 oct. 2010Genworth Financial, Inc.System and process for multivariate adaptive regression splines classification for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US78139901 févr. 201012 oct. 2010Fannie MaeProperty investment rating system and method
US781818618 juin 200219 oct. 2010Genworth Financial, Inc.System for determining a confidence factor for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US781858128 avr. 200819 oct. 2010International Business Machines CorporationData management system
US7821926 *31 août 200726 oct. 2010Sonicwall, Inc.Generalized policy server
US782268030 déc. 200426 oct. 2010Fannie MaeSystem and method for managing data pertaining to a plurality of financial assets for multifamily and housing developments
US784447614 juin 200230 nov. 2010Genworth Financial, Inc.Process for case-based insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US7844477 *18 juin 200230 nov. 2010Genworth Financial, Inc.Process for rule-based insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US7860734 *2 oct. 200328 déc. 2010Employers Reinsurance CorporationSystems and methods for quoting reinsurance
US786078724 janv. 200828 déc. 2010Fannie MaeSystem and method for modifying attribute data pertaining to financial assets in a data processing system
US7865375 *3 janv. 20064 janv. 2011Cerner Innovation, Inc.System and method for multidimensional extension of database information using inferred groupings
US787727927 juin 200725 janv. 2011F.A. Richard & Associates Inc.Method and apparatus for improving the loss ratio on an insurance program book
US788195111 mai 20101 févr. 2011Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for computerized insurance rating
US788588916 déc. 20048 févr. 2011Fannie MaeSystem and method for processing data pertaining to financial assets
US789506218 juin 200222 févr. 2011Genworth Financial, Inc.System for optimization of insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US78950642 sept. 200322 févr. 2011Computer Sciences CorporationGraphical input display in an insurance processing system
US789968818 juin 20021 mars 2011Genworth Financial, Inc.Process for optimization of insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US791285629 oct. 200722 mars 2011Sonicwall, Inc.Adaptive encryption
US79175256 déc. 200629 mars 2011Ingenix, Inc.Analyzing administrative healthcare claims data and other data sources
US792557930 déc. 200512 avr. 2011Fannie MaeSystem and method for processing a loan
US79337861 nov. 200526 avr. 2011Accenture Global Services LimitedCollaborative intelligent task processor for insurance claims
US794549720 déc. 200717 mai 2011Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for utilizing interrelated computerized predictive models
US79793461 oct. 201012 juil. 2011Fannie MaeSystem and method for pricing loans in the secondary mortgage market
US79793824 mai 199912 juil. 2011Accenture Global Services LimitedComponent based information linking during claim processing
US79916306 juin 20082 août 2011Computer Sciences CorporationDisplaying likelihood values for use in settlement
US800098629 juin 200716 août 2011Computer Sciences CorporationClaims processing hierarchy for designee
US8005693 *17 juin 200223 août 2011Genworth Financial, Inc.Process for determining a confidence factor for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US801038929 juin 200730 août 2011Computer Sciences CorporationMultiple policy claims processing
US801039029 juin 200730 août 2011Computer Sciences CorporationClaims processing of information requirements
US801039129 juin 200730 août 2011Computer Sciences CorporationClaims processing hierarchy for insured
US802426528 juin 201020 sept. 2011Fannie MaeSystem and method for verifying loan data at delivery
US803245010 juin 20104 oct. 2011Fannie MaeLoan commitment system and method
US80369199 juil. 200311 oct. 2011Deloitte & Touche LlpLicensed professional scoring system and method
US804629815 déc. 200325 oct. 2011Fannie MaeSystems and methods for facilitating the flow of capital through the housing finance industry
US80603857 déc. 200715 nov. 2011Safeco Insurance Company Of AmericaSystem, program product and method for segmenting and underwriting using voting status
US806044023 déc. 201015 nov. 2011Fannie MaeSystem and method for modifying attribute data pertaining to financial assets in a data processing system
US806521124 nov. 200822 nov. 2011Fannie MaeSystem and method for creating and tracking agreements for selling loans to a secondary market purchaser
US809059928 déc. 20043 janv. 2012Hartford Fire Insurance CompanyMethod and system for computerized insurance underwriting
US8103526 *7 mars 200024 janv. 2012Insweb CorporationSystem and method for flexible insurance rating calculation
US81267429 mai 200328 févr. 2012Accenture Global Services LimitedAutomated assignment of insurable events
US8145507 *23 oct. 200127 mars 2012Deloitte Development LlcCommercial insurance scoring system and method
US818066824 mars 201115 mai 2012Accenture Global Services LimitedCollaborative intelligent task processor for insurance claims
US82143142 juin 20083 juil. 2012Genworth Financial, Inc.System and process for a fusion classification for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US82194246 juin 200810 juil. 2012Computer Sciences CorporationDetermining amounts for claims settlement using likelihood values
US822485911 juil. 201117 juil. 2012Accenture Global Services LimitedComponent based information linking during claim processing
US822977228 déc. 201124 juil. 2012Hartford Fire Insurance CompanyMethod and system for processing of data related to insurance
US822990319 déc. 200224 juil. 2012International Business Machines CorporationSuggesting data interpretations and patterns for updating policy documents
US82445586 juin 200814 août 2012Computer Sciences CorporationDetermining recommended settlement amounts by adjusting values derived from matching similar claims
US82446287 juil. 201014 août 2012Fannie MaeComputerized systems and methods for facilitating the flow of capital through the housing finance industry
US82606829 juin 20114 sept. 2012Leod Network Holdings L.L.C.Systems and methods for online selection of service providers and management of service accounts
US827130319 févr. 201018 sept. 2012Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem for reducing the risk associated with an insured building structure through the incorporation of selected technologies
US8275707 *14 oct. 200525 sept. 2012The Chubb CorporationMethods and systems for normalized identification and prediction of insurance policy profitability
US828561830 sept. 20119 oct. 2012Safeco Insurance Company Of AmericaSystem, program product and method for segmenting and underwriting using voting status
US833224624 juil. 201211 déc. 2012Hartford Fire Insurance CompanyMethod and system for processing of data related to underwriting of insurance
US833570015 août 201118 déc. 2012Deloitte Development LlcLicensed professional scoring system and method
US835593425 janv. 201015 janv. 2013Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystems and methods for prospecting business insurance customers
US835920919 déc. 200722 janv. 2013Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for predicting and responding to likelihood of volatility
US840189621 mars 201219 mars 2013Accenture Global Services LimitedAutomated task processor for insurance claims
US842345017 déc. 200316 avr. 2013Fannie MaeSystem and method for processing data pertaining to financial assets
US842345130 déc. 200516 avr. 2013Fannie MaiSystem and method for processing a loan
US843810828 juin 20107 mai 2013Fannie MaeSystem and method for transferring mortgage loan servicing rights
US847876922 févr. 20082 juil. 2013Accenture Global Services LimitedConversational question generation system adapted for an insurance claim processing system
US848949830 déc. 200516 juil. 2013Fannie MaeSystem and method for processing a loan
US850439410 déc. 20126 août 2013Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for processing of data related to requests for quotes for property and casualty insurance
US851578622 févr. 200820 août 2013Accenture Global Services GmbhRule generation system adapted for an insurance claim processing system
US851586122 sept. 200620 août 2013Fannie MaeSystem and method for facilitating sale of a loan to a secondary market purchaser
US857190014 déc. 201229 oct. 2013Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for processing data relating to insurance claim stability indicator
US85891905 oct. 200719 nov. 2013Liberty Mutual Insurance CompanySystem and method for underwriting a prepackaged business owners insurance policy
US861226427 janv. 200917 déc. 2013Atera Solutions, LlcRandomized competitive insurance pricing system and method
US8655687 *15 févr. 201218 févr. 2014Deloitte Development LlcCommercial insurance scoring system and method
US865569029 juil. 201318 févr. 2014Hartford Fire Insurance CompanyComputer system and method for processing of data related to insurance quoting
US866687930 déc. 20034 mars 2014Fannie MaeMethod and system for pricing forward commitments for mortgage loans and for buying committed loans
US867105214 sept. 201211 mars 2014Fannie MaeMethod and system for pricing forward commitments for mortgage loans and for buying committed loans
US867661214 sept. 201218 mars 2014Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem for adjusting insurance for a building structure through the incorporation of selected technologies
US867670327 avr. 200618 mars 2014Guidewire Software, Inc.Insurance policy revisioning method and apparatus
US870064928 mars 201115 avr. 2014Optuminsight, Inc.Analyzing administrative healthcare claims data and other data sources
US8793146 *17 juin 200229 juil. 2014Genworth Holdings, Inc.System for rule-based insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US879898723 oct. 20135 août 2014Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for processing data relating to insurance claim volatility
US881233218 févr. 201419 août 2014Hartford Fire Insurance CompanyComputer system and method for processing of data related to generating insurance quotes
US8892452 *9 nov. 201218 nov. 2014Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystems and methods for adjusting insurance workflow
US891441021 mars 201116 déc. 2014Sonicwall, Inc.Query interface to policy server
US89353111 févr. 201213 janv. 2015Sonicwall, Inc.Generalized policy server
US912905920 févr. 20148 sept. 2015Optuminsight, Inc.Analyzing administrative healthcare claims data and other data sources
US915448914 août 20136 oct. 2015Dell Software Inc.Query interface to policy server
US927692014 août 20131 mars 2016Dell Software Inc.Tunneling using encryption
US931167616 août 200712 avr. 2016Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystems and methods for analyzing sensor data
US933199214 août 20133 mai 2016Dell Software Inc.Access control
US943857714 août 20136 sept. 2016Dell Software Inc.Query interface to policy server
US946047115 déc. 20104 oct. 2016Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for an automated validation system
US95080832 juil. 201329 nov. 2016Oracle International CorporationExtensibility for sales predictor (SPE)
US966591011 févr. 200930 mai 2017Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for providing customized safety feedback
US20010051960 *28 mars 200113 déc. 2001Kubick Ronald S.Methods and systems for conducting due diligence
US20010054046 *4 avr. 200120 déc. 2001Dmitry MikhailovAutomatic forms handling system
US20020082872 *26 juin 200127 juin 2002Mitsubishi Denki Kabushiki KaishaEstimation requesting method and system in electronic business
US20020083067 *27 sept. 200127 juin 2002Pablo TamayoEnterprise web mining system and method
US20020091553 *30 oct. 200111 juil. 2002Spincor Llc, A Delawer CorporationProviding termination benefits for employees
US20020095317 *9 août 200118 juil. 2002Miralink CorporationData/presence insurance tools and techniques
US20020116327 *4 déc. 200122 août 2002Venkatesan SrinivasanSystem and methods for syndication of financial obligations
US20020123923 *1 mars 20015 sept. 2002Stefanos ManganarisMethod and system for assessing intrinsic customer value
US20020128874 *7 mars 200112 sept. 2002Mcintosh Prudence A.Computer-implemented vehicle repair claims rules generator system
US20020128876 *7 mars 200112 sept. 2002Mahoney Michael J.Computer-implemented vehicle repair claims processing system
US20020128891 *14 févr. 200112 sept. 2002Mcsherry JamesMethod and apparatus for managing workplace services and products
US20020138332 *14 févr. 200126 sept. 2002Ncr CorporationComputer implemented customer value model in airline industry
US20020143644 *3 avr. 20013 oct. 2002Cafer TosunConnection tool for connecting analytical applications to electronic document sources
US20020147618 *1 févr. 200210 oct. 2002Mezrah Todd M.Online insurance sales platform
US20020159625 *2 avr. 200231 oct. 2002Cytoprint, Inc.Method and apparatus for discovering, identifying and comparing biological activity mechanisms
US20020161609 *23 oct. 200131 oct. 2002Zizzamia Frank M.Commercial insurance scoring system and method
US20030018486 *11 sept. 200123 janv. 2003Jacob FeldmanConsistency validation for complex classification rules
US20030061075 *17 mai 200227 mars 2003Converium Reinsurance (North America) Inc.System and method for rating and structuring bands of crop production insurance
US20030093521 *4 nov. 200215 mai 2003Xerox Corporation.Asset management system for network-based and non-network-based assets and information
US20030097583 *16 nov. 200122 mai 2003International Business Machines CorporationData management system and method
US20030099973 *16 juil. 200229 mai 2003University Of Louisville Research Foundation, Inc.E-GeneChip online web service for data mining bioinformatics
US20030101080 *28 nov. 200129 mai 2003Zizzamia Frank M.Method and system for determining the importance of individual variables in a statistical model
US20030126049 *31 déc. 20013 juil. 2003Nagan Douglas A.Programmed assessment of technological, legal and management risks
US20030187699 *17 juin 20022 oct. 2003Bonissone Piero PatroneSystem for rule-based insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
US20030208402 *27 mars 20036 nov. 2003Eric BibelnieksSystem and method for increasing the effectiveness of customer contact strategies
US20030208422 *1 août 20016 nov. 2003Adam BurczykComputer system and method for selectively monetizing and trading the results of risk factor populations found in financial exposures
US20030216947 *20 mai 200220 nov. 2003Callen Brock W.Pricing employee termination benefits
US20030229552 *5 juin 200211 déc. 2003Lebaric Katarina J.System and method for deal-making decision optimization
US20030233260 *14 juin 200218 déc. 2003Reinsurance Group Of America CorporationComputerized system and method of performing insurability analysis
US20040024620 *23 juin 20035 févr. 2004Rightfind Technology Company, LlcRisk classification methodology
US20040039610 *23 août 200226 févr. 2004Weitermann Michael FredrickRandomized competitive insurance pricing system and method
US20040049473 *5 sept. 200211 mars 2004David John GowerInformation analytics systems and methods
US20040054553 *9 juil. 200318 mars 2004Zizzamia Frank M.Licensed professional scoring system and method
US20040064346 *1 oct. 20021 avr. 2004Reto SchneiderMethod and system for gathering information relating to risks
US20040111300 *20 mai 200210 juin 2004Callen Brock W.Tax withholding on employee termination benefits
US20040122823 *19 déc. 200224 juin 2004International Business Machines Corp.Suggesting data interpretations and patterns for updating policy documents
US20040181435 *14 juin 200216 sept. 2004Reinsurance Group Of America CorporationComputerized system and method of performing insurability analysis
US20040215553 *16 déc. 200328 oct. 2004Fannie MaeSystem and method for facilitating sale of a loan to a secondary market purchaser
US20040220873 *17 déc. 20034 nov. 2004Fannie MaeSystem and method for defining loan products
US20040225596 *17 déc. 200311 nov. 2004Fannie MaeSystem and method for facilitating delivery of a loan to a secondary mortgage market purchaser
US20040232980 *7 juin 200425 nov. 2004Broadcom CorporationApparatus, system, and method for amplifying a signal, and applications thereof
US20050021392 *16 sept. 200327 janv. 2005English Kurt E.Methods for facilitating private funding of early-stage companies
US20050060193 *25 nov. 200317 mars 2005Lancaster Brian J.System and method for evidence-based modeling of clinical operations
US20050075910 *2 oct. 20037 avr. 2005Dhar SolanklSystems and methods for quoting reinsurance
US20050102292 *17 déc. 200412 mai 2005Pablo TamayoEnterprise web mining system and method
US20050149376 *20 déc. 20047 juil. 2005Accenture LlpComponent based interface to handle tasks during claim processing
US20050171885 *3 nov. 20044 août 2005Christman David T.Object oriented demographically predictive insurance agency asset evaluation system and method
US20050182779 *13 févr. 200418 août 2005Genworth Financial, Inc.Method and system for storing and retrieving document data using a markup language string and a serialized string
US20050187809 *13 janv. 200525 août 2005Falkenhainer Brian C.Adaptive process systems and methods for managing business processes
US20050273371 *12 juil. 20058 déc. 2005Callen Brock WProviding termination benefits for employees
US20060136273 *9 sept. 200522 juin 2006Frank ZizzamiaMethod and system for estimating insurance loss reserves and confidence intervals using insurance policy and claim level detail predictive modeling
US20060242160 *7 juin 200126 oct. 2006Firoz KanchwallaMethod and apparatus for transporting data for data warehousing applications that incorporates analytic data interface
US20060259333 *16 mai 200516 nov. 2006Inventum CorporationPredictive exposure modeling system and method
US20070005154 *3 janv. 20064 janv. 2007Cerner Innovation, Inc.System and method for multidimensional extension of database information using inferred groupings
US20070016542 *1 juil. 200618 janv. 2007Matt RosauerRisk modeling system
US20070021987 *21 juil. 200625 janv. 2007Trurisk, LlcComputerized medical modeling of group life insurance using medical claims data
US20070050481 *26 oct. 20061 mars 2007Rod RigoleSystems and methods for online selection of service providers and management of service accounts
US20070162454 *29 déc. 200512 juil. 2007D Albora Paul AMethod and apparatus for managing a computer-based address book for incident-related work
US20070174252 *6 déc. 200626 juil. 2007Ingenix Inc.Analyzing Administrative Healthcare Claims Data and Other Data Sources
US20070233586 *14 juin 20074 oct. 2007Shiping LiuMethod and apparatus for identifying cross-selling opportunities based on profitability analysis
US20070255601 *27 avr. 20061 nov. 2007Guidewire Software, Inc.Insurance policy revisioning method and apparatus
US20070295556 *22 juin 200627 déc. 2007Oded GrinbergDevice system and method of adjustable telescopic legs
US20080028436 *31 août 200731 janv. 2008Sonicwall, Inc.Generalized policy server
US20080147448 *19 déc. 200719 juin 2008Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for predicting and responding to likelihood of volatility
US20080154651 *20 déc. 200726 juin 2008Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for utilizing interrelated computerized predictive models
US20080172366 *29 oct. 200717 juil. 2008Clifford Lee HannelQuery Interface to Policy Server
US20080222429 *28 avr. 200811 sept. 2008Lacan Francis MData management system
US20090043615 *7 août 200712 févr. 2009Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystems and methods for predictive data analysis
US20090132301 *27 janv. 200921 mai 2009Michael Fredrick WeitermannRandomized competitive insurance pricing system and method
US20090164258 *19 déc. 200825 juin 2009American International Group, Inc.System and method for selling insurance products
US20100070311 *23 nov. 200918 mars 2010Clark Allan HeydonInsurance Policy Revisioning Method
US20100223079 *11 mai 20102 sept. 2010Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for computerized insurance rating
US20110040582 *17 août 200917 févr. 2011Kieran MullinsOnline system and method of insurance underwriting
US20110071858 *24 sept. 200924 mars 2011Guidewire Software, Inc.Method and apparatus for managing revisions and tracking of insurance policy elements
US20110071859 *6 janv. 201024 mars 2011Guidewire Software, Inc.Method and Apparatus for Pricing Insurance Policies
US20110218827 *16 mai 20118 sept. 2011Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for utilizing interrelated computerized predictive models
US20110231422 *28 mars 201122 sept. 2011Ingenix Inc.Analyzing administrative healthcare claims data and other data sources
US20120101855 *12 déc. 201126 avr. 2012The Travelers Indemnity CompanyMonitoring client-selected vehicle parameters in accordance with client preferences
US20120271659 *15 févr. 201225 oct. 2012Deloitte & Touche LlpCommercial insurance scoring system and method
US20140149180 *19 avr. 201329 mai 2014Oracle International CorporationSale prediction engine rules
US20140278566 *15 mars 201318 sept. 2014Hartford Fire Insurance CompanySystem and method for workers' compensation relationed risk analysis
USRE4643931 août 200613 juin 2017Dropbox, Inc.Distributed administration of access to information and interface for same
WO2002005194A1 *12 juil. 200117 janv. 2002Angel Strategies, LlcMethods for facilitating private funding of early-stage companies
WO2002049260A2 *23 oct. 200120 juin 2002Deloitte & Touche LlpCommercial insurance scoring system and method
WO2002049260A3 *23 oct. 200113 mars 2003Deloitte & Touche LlpCommercial insurance scoring system and method
WO2002061527A2 *1 févr. 20028 août 2002Mezrah Todd MOnline insurance sales platform
WO2002061527A3 *1 févr. 200214 nov. 2002Todd M MezrahOnline insurance sales platform
WO2002082707A3 *3 avr. 200219 févr. 2004Kok Thim ChewA connection tool for connecting analytical applications to electronic document sources
WO2002084520A1 *16 avr. 200224 oct. 2002Pro-Super Holdings LimitedBusiness tracking and communication system
WO2003001341A2 *25 juin 20023 janv. 2003BomazuRisk evaluation system and methods
WO2003001341A3 *25 juin 20023 juil. 2003BomazuRisk evaluation system and methods
WO2003017060A2 *16 août 200227 févr. 2003Exigen GroupConsistency validation for complex classification rules
WO2003017060A3 *16 août 200224 déc. 2003Exigen GroupConsistency validation for complex classification rules
WO2003058381A2 *13 déc. 200217 juil. 2003Ge Financial Assurance Holdings, Inc.System for optimization of insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
WO2003058381A3 *13 déc. 20028 avr. 2004Ge Financial Assurance HoldingSystem for optimization of insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
WO2003058388A2 *16 déc. 200217 juil. 2003Ge Financial Assurance Holdings, Inc. (A Richmond Corporation)Process for determining a confidence factor for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
WO2003058388A3 *16 déc. 200216 oct. 2003Ge Financial Assurance HoldingProcess for determining a confidence factor for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
WO2003058389A2 *16 déc. 200217 juil. 2003Ge Financial Assurance Holdings, Inc.System for determining a confidence factor for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
WO2003058389A3 *16 déc. 20026 nov. 2003Ge Financial Assurance HoldingSystem for determining a confidence factor for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
WO2003065268A1 *16 déc. 20027 août 2003Ge Financial Assurance Holdings, Inc.Process for rule-based insurance underwriting
WO2004099945A2 *1 avr. 200418 nov. 2004Ge Financial Assurance Holdings, Inc.Automated dominance classification for insurance underwriting
WO2004099945A3 *1 avr. 20041 déc. 2005Piero Patrone BonissoneAutomated dominance classification for insurance underwriting
WO2004100043A1 *22 mars 200418 nov. 2004Ge Financial Assurance Holdings, Inc.System and process for a neural network classification for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
WO2004100049A2 *19 mars 200418 nov. 2004Ge Financial Assurance Holdings, Inc.System and process for multivariate adaptive regression splines classification for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
WO2004100049A3 *19 mars 200429 déc. 2005Piero Patrone BonissoneSystem and process for multivariate adaptive regression splines classification for insurance underwriting suitable for use by an automated system
WO2007005975A2 *1 juil. 200611 janv. 2007Valen Technologies, Inc.Risk modeling system
WO2007005975A3 *1 juil. 200620 sept. 2007Valen Technologies IncRisk modeling system
Classifications
Classification aux États-Unis705/4, 705/7.28
Classification internationaleG06Q10/06
Classification coopérativeG06Q40/08, G06Q10/0635
Classification européenneG06Q40/08, G06Q10/0635
Événements juridiques
DateCodeÉvénementDescription
10 sept. 1997ASAssignment
Owner name: IBM CORPORATION, NEW YORK
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:APTE, CHIDANAND V.;PEDNAULT, EDWIN P.D.;ROSEN, BARRY K.;AND OTHERS;REEL/FRAME:008793/0902;SIGNING DATES FROM 19970908 TO 19970909
7 mai 2003REMIMaintenance fee reminder mailed
20 oct. 2003LAPSLapse for failure to pay maintenance fees
16 déc. 2003FPExpired due to failure to pay maintenance fee
Effective date: 20031019